The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread (white ball edition)

[Burgey]

Noooooo!

People doing what I did and misinterpreting stuff, then making fools out of themselves, is one of the best things about CW.

Your sarcastic viewpoint was just becoming so much of an actual thing that I mistook it for a real opinion.

Tbf he is generally very earnest

 

[stephen]

I would go as far to say the fifth bowler is the most important one. You are not likely to get wrong on your top bowler. You know exactly who it is and will pick him every single time.

A pie bowling 5th bowler could get thrashed for 10-0-130-0 on a flat pitch. Replace him with 2 pie bowlers and you get 5-0-60-0 and 5-0-70-0.



This is only because actual ATG sides like Aus and WI never played against another ATG side. They almost never needed a good 5th bowler. Australia still picked Watson when they had him though. You would actually see a non ATG side (sides containing Dev, Pollock, Flintoff, Klusener etc) pick them. They needed every bit of the multiple dimensions these players brought.

There is plenty of opportunity for sides to pick 5 man bowling attacks with bowlers who can bat at around someone like Starc's level at 7. But they don't. You almost always see batsmen who can bowl a bit or genuine all rounders picked (Watson, Kallis, Flintoff and Shakib are pretty close to the most genuine all rounders we've seen).

Who knows, maybe it will become fashionable to pick 5 bowlers, 5 batsmen and a keeper as a way to counter the ridiculous scores in modern cricket but then again it's hard to find three decent international level bowlers fort most countries, let alone 5.

My point is not that Flintoff would do just as well as Symonds as a fifth bowler (of course he'd be better - he was a better bowler than Symonds), my point is that a strong case can be made that between Viv and Tendulkar, the ATG side can stack batting and doesn't need to pick a number 7 based on their ability to bowl since they can already cover the overs to a reasonable level.

 

[stephen]

In fact, Australia might have considered playing:

Finch
Warner
Khawaja
Smith
Maxwell
Carey+
Coulter-Nile
Starc
Cummins
Behrendorff
Zampa

Last world cup but they always played Stoinis, who is a worse bowler than NCN or Behrendorff for the extra batting.

 

[Burgey]

He was a worse batsman than than NCN and Dorf at the last WC tbf, let alone bowler. **** he was woeful. Shits me they persisted with him and also the pillow instead of TPC at three.

 

[CricAddict]

Warne's world cup exploits in 99 we're incredible. He was coming back from injury and in the worst form of his life in all formats. Then he single handedly dragged his side back from the brink with a man of the match performance in the semi final before destroying Pakistan in the final.

It's that big game mentality that people might value in an all time side.

Certainly what Murali did in 1996 was great, but it wasn't really comparable to the 99 cup finals for Warne.

You credit Warne for doing well in WC while coming back from injury and poor form but give it as an excuse while quoting his poor performances in India in tests. It can't be both ways.

 

[harsh.ag]

Murali also took a 4 fer in the 2007 semi if anyone's interested

 

[ankitj]

Murali also took a 4 fer in the 2007 semi if anyone's interested

nope

 

[ImpatientLime]

I'm not sure I can recall a single historical ODI side that has gone with a 5 frontline bowler scenario consistently. Usually it's 4 bowlers + 2 bits and pieces players.

is this for real?

the last world cup final

england front line bowlers - woakes, archer, wood, plunkett, rashid, stokes
new zealand front line bowlers - boult, ferguson, santner, henry, cdg

the english team over the past four years has consistently had 5 front line bowlers as a minimum. often 6 with stokes and buttler in the top 6.

wanna see the impact of picking trash as your fifth choice bowler in a odi? go watch the recent nz - india series.

 

[Red]

A pie bowling 5th bowler could get thrashed for 10-0-130-0 on a flat pitch.

This is so ridiculous.

 

[Red]

is this for real?

the last world cup final

england front line bowlers - woakes, archer, wood, plunkett, rashid, stokes
new zealand front line bowlers - boult, ferguson, santner, henry, cdg

the english team over the past four years has consistently had 5 front line bowlers as a minimum. often 6 with stokes and buttler in the top 6.

wanna see the impact of picking trash as your fifth choice bowler in a odi? go watch the recent nz - india series.

The point he is making is there though. For NZ, DeGrandHomme and Santner are both decent bats, very capable at 7 and 8. England have plenty of flexibility, but Woakes and Curran are decent batsmen, Stokes is Stokes, and they have two keepers who can bat top 6. You have to have guys at 7 and 8 who can bat. Having a couple of all-rounders balances the side perfectly.

I think you also need to define "trash as your fifth choice bowler". Because if you're talking someone on Symonds level, you're clearly wrong.

 

[ImpatientLime]

The point he is making is there though. For NZ, DeGrandHomme and Santner are both decent bats, very capable at 7 and 8. England have plenty of flexibility, but Woakes and Curran are decent batsmen, Stokes is Stokes, and they have two keepers who can bat top 6. You have to have guys at 7 and 8 who can bat. Having a couple of all-rounders balances the side perfectly.

I think you also need to define "trash as your fifth choice bowler". Because if you're talking someone on Symonds level, you're clearly wrong.

versus an atg odi xi symonds would be taken down a notch. that is the sphere we're talking here.

 

[jimmy101]

Geez can't believe Symonds as a 5th bowler in an ATG XI is still being spoken about.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Geez can't believe Symonds as a 5th bowler in an ATG XI is still being spoken about.

Honestly the arguments are getting so painfully repetitive and neither side is listening to the others points such that I think I'm not going to bother bringing him up in future

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Honestly the arguments are getting so painfully repetitive and neither side is listening to the others points such that I think I'm not going to bother bringing him up in future

Yeah that's just standard fare for these sort of threads. Some here have been peddling their nonsense for almost 19 odd years, so it won't be changing anytime soon

 

[jimmy101]

Time for a bit of a change of pace then. Here is my all-time England XI. (I'm sure someone could do better than this tbh).

Jason Roy
Kevin Pietersen
Joe Root
Eoin Morgan*
Allan Lamb
Jos Buttler+
Ben Stokes
Andrew Flintoff
Ian Botham
Graeme Swann
Darren Gough

Unlucky: Jonny Bairstow, Marcus Trescothick, Graeme Hick, Paul Collingwood, Stuart Broad, Chris Woakes, Adil Rashid, Liam Plunkett, James Anderson, Bob Willis

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Is a strong lineup, relying on Stokes to bowl 10 consistently may be occasionally problematic but other than that it looks a strong unit

Plunkett is a hack

 

[jimmy101]

Is a strong lineup, relying on Stokes to bowl 10 consistently may be occasionally problematic but other than that it looks a strong unit

That's the only part of the lineup that was troubling me. A few things to fix that would be to drop Stokes for Anderson & bump everyone from Flintoff down up one position. Other than that I could possibly give either Roy or Lamb the axe & again play Anderson at #11 (or even Rashid on a turning pitch).

Hypothetically Collingwood could also come in for Stokes, but not sure if that's an ideal trade off.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Is a strong lineup, relying on Stokes to bowl 10 consistently may be occasionally problematic but other than that it looks a strong unit

Plunkett is a hack

My thoughts exactly. Too much batting, not enough bowling. Not sure which bowler you'd pick though, none of them really look like ATG potential.

edit: Then again Root can bowl. Stokes and Root can easily be a 5th bowler between them. Comes down to whether you think having extra batting at 7, 8 and 9 really helps more than having a good 5th bowler. And now this argument is starting to sound familiar . . .

 

[jimmy101]

My thoughts exactly. Too much batting, not enough bowling. Not sure which bowler you'd pick though, none of them really look like ATG potential.

edit: Then again Root can bowl. Stokes and Root can easily be a 5th bowler between them. Comes down to whether you think having extra batting at 7, 8 and 9 really helps more than having a good 5th bowler. And now this argument is starting to sound familiar . . .

Might be a bit early to have Roy in the ATXI as it is. Best option would probably be to throw in either Anderson or Rashid (dependant on pitch conditions) and open with Pietersen & Root. Either way England have plenty of #batdeep going on.

 

[DriveClub]

Time for a bit of a change of pace then. Here is my all-time England XI. (I'm sure someone could do better than this tbh).

Jason Roy
Kevin Pietersen
Joe Root
Eoin Morgan*
Allan Lamb
Jos Buttler+
Ben Stokes
Andrew Flintoff
Ian Botham
Graeme Swann
Darren Gough

Unlucky: Jonny Bairstow, Marcus Trescothick, Graeme Hick, Paul Collingwood, Stuart Broad, Chris Woakes, Adil Rashid, Liam Plunkett, James Anderson, Bob Willis

Good team, I actually wouldn't be opposed to swapping Lamb with Collingwood to get some extra 5th bowling option. Similiar sort of batsmen in terms of strike rate I think, I could be wrong..